n* 


f  THE 

liwfVFRsiry  of  Illinois 
FEB  1915 


Extracts  from  Messages  and  Addresses 
of  Governors  of  Virginia 
Regarding  Taxation 

1893-1914 


COMPILED  BY 

LEWIS  H.  MACHEN 

DIRECTOR  OF 

THE  LEGISLATIVE  REFERENCE  BUREAU 
OF  VIRGINIA 


RICHMOND: 

DAVI8  BOTTOM,  SUPERINTENDENT  PUBLIC  PRINTING 

1915 


3  3  k  ■  K 

U  gl3fc- 


Extract  from  the  Inaugural  Address  of  Governor  Henry  C. 
•  ~  Stuart,  February  2,1914 

V  — 

u.  The  functions  of  government  are  misapplied  unless  there  is 
^produced  approximate  equality  in  the  distribution  of  burdens  and 
,H  benefits.  That  no  such  equality  is  incident  to  our  present  system 
of  taxation  is  perfectly  obvious.  Discriminations  are  flagrant  and 
should  be  removed  with  as  little  delay  as  possible,  llie  task  is  diffi¬ 
cult,  but  is  not,  for  that  reason,  to  be  postponed  or  slighted.  No 
more  important  task  is  assigned  to  those  to  whom  the  people  must 
look  for  the  correction  of  the  evils  of  a  system  which  exacts  from 
some  much  more  than  they  should  fairly  pay,  and  from  others  cor¬ 
respondingly  less. 

The  present  rate  of  State  taxation  on  all  classes  of  property, 
real  and  personal,  is  equal  and  uniform,  and  existing  discrimina¬ 
tions  must,  therefore,  arise  from  the  non-assessment,  or  under¬ 
assessment,  or  over-assessment  of  property.  Accordingly,  I  think 
it  is  clear  that  the  initial  step  in  tax  reform ‘is  to  put  under  actual 
contribution  every  kind  and  description  of  property  not  exempt  by 
law,  and  thus  so  broaden  the  base  of  taxation  as  that  the  common 
burden  may  rest  lightly  on  all. 

Real  estate  is  assessed  at  intervals  of  five  years  by  assessors 
appointed  by  the  courts,  many  of  the  counties  being  divided  into 
two  or  more  assessment  districts.  Personal  property  is  assessed 
every  year  by  commissioners  of  the  revenue  elected  by  the  peo¬ 
ple,  and  in  some  counties  there  are  half  a  dozen  or  more  districts, 
each  having  a  commissioner.  There  is  no  adequate  provision  for 
local  equalization,  and  gross  inequalities  frequently  obtain  in  the 
valuation  of  both  realty  and  personalty  in  the  different  assessment 
districts  of  the  same  county.  Likewise  there  is  no  provision  for 
State  equalization,  and  just  as  gross  inequalities  obtain  affecting 
counties  and  cities,  and  the  various  sections  in  their  relation  to  each 
.  other.  All  of  this  occasions  no  surprise,  when  it  is  considered  that 
the  duty  of  making  the  assessments  is  performed  by  hundreds  of  indi- 
vidual  officials  who  do  not  act  in  concert,  and  each  of  whom,  so  far  at 
least  as  the  assessment  of  real  estate  is  concerned,  has  no  other  guide 
than  his  own  judgment  as  to  what  is  a  fair  market  value.  The 
S  woeful  lack  of  uniformity  which  prevails,  with  consequent  wide¬ 
spread  injustice  and  complaint,  is  inevitable  under  such  a  system. 

For  the  purpose  of  remedying  a  system  which  is  confessedly 
and  glaringly  defective,  equalization  is  a  fundamental  necessity. 
The  difficulties  of  equalization  become  more  apparent  when  we  con¬ 
sider  carefully  the  facts  to  which  the  present  inequality  is  largelv 

'  [3] 


due.  A  tax  rate  which  is  made  abnormally  high  by  the  under¬ 
assessment  of  visible  property  becomes  unjust  when  it  is  applied 
to  intangible  property,  which  in  most  cases  is  assessed  at  its  par  or 
face  value,  and  in  any  case  by  easily  ascertained  standard  of  value. 
Under  these  conditions  the  owner  of  intangible  property  seeks  re¬ 
lief  from  what  he  considers  a  disproportionate  burden  by  failing 
or  refusing  to  report  his  property  for  assessment  and  taxation. 
The  owner  of  real  estate  and  visible  property  accepts  with  com¬ 
placency  the  benefits  of  under-assessment  of  his  own  property,  in 
the  full  knowledge  that  a  large  percentage  of  intangible  property 
is  not  assessed  at  all.  A  just  scheme  of  equalization  must,  there¬ 
fore,  deal  at  one  and  the  same  time  with  property  under-assessed 
and  with  property,  the  bulk  of  which  is  not  assessed  at  all.  On 
any  other  principle  the  process  of  equalization  might,  and  most 
certainly  would,  result  in  large  increases  in  assessments  of  prop¬ 
erty  that  could  not  from  its  nature  go  into  hiding,  such  as  real 
estate,  without  bringing  into  contribution  any  fair  proportion  of 
intangible  property,  thus  aggravating,  rather  than  relieving,  exist¬ 
ing  inequalities. 

Assuming  that  a  body  could  be  created  with  powers  sufficiently 
broad  and  comprehensive  to  deal  justly  with  the  situation  as  it  is 
presented,  I  would  suggest  tentatively  local  boards  of  equalization 
for  counties  and  cities,  to  insure  uniformity  of  assessments  in  every 
county  or  city  for  State  and  local  taxation,  and  a  State  l)oard  of 
equalization,  composed  of  a  representative  of  each  grand  division 
of  the  State,  and  charged  with  the  supervision  of  all  assessments 
made  by  the  local  boards,  and  given  authority  to  equalize  assess¬ 
ment  values,  so  as  to  prevent  any  inequality  from  which  otherwise 
any  section,  county  or  city  might  suffer.  The  assessment  of  all 
property  would  be  within  the  jurisdiction  of  these  boards,  except 
that  belonging  to  public-service  corporations,  which  is  assessed  by 
the  State  Corporation  Commission. 

I  quite  understand  that  equalization  is  one  thing,  and  that  it 
is  another  thing  to  discover  and  place  under  contribution  property 
which  is  intangible.  Equality  of  assessment  and  equality  of  rate 
would  be  incomplete  as  between  different  classes  of  property,  with¬ 
out  equality  of  accessibility.  While  I  appreciate  the  difficulty  of 
fully  reaching  for  taxation  this  class  of  property,  I  do  not  con¬ 
cur  in  the  view  that  it  should  be  singled  out  for  preference  or  favor, 
and  I  will  never  agree  that  visible  real  and  personal  property  shall 
be  made  to  bear  a  disproportion  of  the  burdens  of  government.  On 
the  other  hand,  I  am  firmly  of  the  opinion  that  intangibles  should 
be  expected  and  compelled  to  pay  their  proper  share  of  the  revenue 
required  for  the  support  of  the  government.  T,  therefore,  favor  such 
practical  and  reasonable  measures  as  will  tend  to  give  the  assessor 

[4] 


and  tax  gatherer  the  same  access  to  intangibles  that  he  now  has  to 
property  which  is  visible.  Of  course,  intangibles  should  not  be 
made  to  pay  more  than  a  proper  share,  and,  therefore,  if  it  can 
be  assumed  that  visible  property  will  always  be  assessed  at  some¬ 
thing  less  than  its  actual  value,  the  legislation  for  the  modifi¬ 
cation  of  our  system  might  provide  a  maximum  rate  for  the  taxation 
of  intangibles,  the  actual  value  of  which  is  easily  ascertained, 
whether  for  State  or  local  purposes,  leaving  any  deviation  from 
that  rate  to  a  lower  rate,  with  a  view  to  preventing  discrimination 
against  the  owners  of  intangible  property,  to  the  discretion  of  the 
State  board,  which  would  have  the  most  intimate  and  detailed 
knowledge  of  the  entire  subject. 

The  annual  addition  to  the  total  revenue  of  the  State  should 
be  strictly  limited,  so  that  the  rate  of  taxation  would  automatically 
fall  with  the  inevitable  increase  of  assessed  values.  Such  a  limita¬ 
tion  with  reference  to  revenue  for  the  use  of  any  county  or  city 
is  something  that  can  be  safely  left  to  the  action  of  the  local  au¬ 
thorities. 

A  plan  of  equalization  conceived  and  executed  as  I  have  in¬ 
dicated,  would,  in  my  opinion,  reduce  to  a  minimum  and  distribute 
as  evenly  as  possible  the  necessary  burdens  on  all  tax-payers.  The 
rate  of  taxation  on  all  classes  of  property  w7ould  then  be  low  enough 
to  satisfy  any  patriotic  citizen  who  recognizes  the  fact  that  one 
dollar  in  every  seven  we  collect  goes  to  the  discharge  of  an  ante- 
bellum  debt.  Exemptions  and  abnormally  low  rates  are  onlv  pos¬ 
sible  in  States  which  are  not  only  out  of  debt,  but  which  have  large 
fixed  sources  of  revenue  independent  of  that  derived  by  direct 
taxation  of  the  citizen. 

The  co-operation  of  the  Corporation  Commission,  whose  duty 
it  is  to  assess  the  property  of  public-service  corporations,  is,  of  course, 
essential  to  the  accomplishment  of  any  desired  reform.  I  may  as 
well  say  in  this  connection  that,  in  dealing  with  public  service  cor¬ 
porations,  I  favor  a  policy  which,  while  vigorous  and  unyielding  in 
the  enforcement  of  the  rights  of  the  public  as  to  service,  facilities 
and  charges  therefor,  will  be  equally  so  in  the  protection  of  the 
corporations  from  undue  burdens  and  exactions. 

If  it  should  be  found  impossible  to  devise  any  effective  plan  of 
tax  reform  involving  equalization  and  at  the  same  time  guarding 
the  owners  of  the  several  classes  of  property  against  discrimination, 
there  should  be  legislation  providing  for  such  segregation  of  the 
subjects  of  taxation  as  the  constitution  contemplates,  so  framed  as 
to  give  compensation  to  counties  and  cities  surrendering  an  undue 
share  of  the  taxable  values  on  which  they  subsist  and  upon  which 
have  been  predicated  their  obligations.  Segregation  is  the  only 
alternative  to  the  plan  tentatively  suggested,  and  of  which  T  have 
undertaken  to  give  only  the  barest  outline. 

[5] 


Extract  from  the  Message  of  Governor  William  Hodges  Mann, 

January  14,  1914 


The  people  of  Virginia  demand,  I  think  wisely,  the  passage 
of  such  laws  for  the  taxation  of  real  and  personal  property,  whether 
tangible  or  intangible,  which  will  compel  each  citizen  to  contribute 
his  or  her  share  of  the  money  needed  by  the  State  for  the  protection 
of  the  rights  of  persons  and  property,  for  the  care  of  the  unfortu¬ 
nates  who  are  unable  to  care  for  themselves,  and  which  will  make 
Virginia  progressive  and  put  it  abreast  of  the  States  having  the 
wisest  laws  on  this  important  subject. 

Having  been  a  member  of  the  tax  commission  under  the  acc 
approved  March  14,  1910,  and  having  given  a  great  deal  of  thought 
to  the  subject  before  and  since  the  report  of  the  commission  to  the 
General  Assembly  of  1912,  I  desire  to  submit  certain  suggestions 
and  recommendations  for  your  consideration,  and  I  trust,  for  your 
approval. 

I  approached  this  subject  in  1910  with  the  conviction  that 
there  must  be  either  segregation,  or  an  equalization  of  assessment 
in  the  different  counties  and  cities  of  the  State,  and  I  then  strongly 
favored  segregation.  This,  of  course,  would  have  made  equalization 
unnecessary,  but  would  not  have  done  away  with  the  necessity  for 
a  fair  assessment  of  the  property  of  our  citizens,  as  such  a  valuation 
largely  determines  the  wealth  and  the  relative  influence  and  im¬ 
portance  of  our  State.  After  a  careful  examination  of  the  resources 
of  the  State  and  its  political  subdivisions,  while  a  member  of  the 
Tax  Commission  and  since  it  ceased  to  exist,  and  especially  in 
the  light  of  a  plan  submitted  by  the  fiscal  officer  of  the  State,  as 
much  interested  in  and  just  as  desirous  of  reaching  a  proper  solu¬ 
tion  of  the  tax  problem  as  I  am,  the  conclusion  has  been  reached 
that  no  plan  of  segregation  is  workable  which  makes  the  income 
of  the  State,  or  any  considerable  part  of  it,  depend  upon  a  per 
centum  tax  to  be  paid  by  counties  and  cities  on  property,  the 
valuation  of  which  is  wholly  under  the  control  and  powder  of  the 
counties  and  cities.  Such  a  plan,  even  with  an  honest  desire  on  the 
part  of  the  cities  and  counties,  which  I,  of  course,  assume,  could 
not  result  in  an  equal  assessment,  as  there  would  be  no  controlling 
or  supervising  tribunal  familiar  with  general  conditions  and  charged 
with  the  duty  of  equalization.  And  as  it  is  admitted  that  the  plan 
above  mentioned  would  require  this  per  centum,  my  contention,  if 
correct,  would  seem  to  dispose  of  it. 

The  fundamental  principle  of  taxation  is  equality.  It  should 
Q  |  not  be  said  that  each  citizen  must  bear  his  share  of  the  public 


[6] 


burden,  but  that  each  should  contribute  his  share  to  the  expense 
of  government,  which,  if  properly  administered,  is  not  a  burden  but 
a  protection,  a  benefit  and  a  blessing. 

To  secure,  therefore,  this  fundamental,  fair  and  equal  valuation, 
which  shall  at  once  fix  the  amount  of  the  citizen’s  contribution  to 
the  government  and  determine  the  wealth  and  largely  the  influence 
and  power  of  the  State,  I  recommend  that  three  discreet  men  be 
appointed  from  each  congressional  district  to  assess  and  determine 
the  average  value  of  the  real  and  tangible  personal  estate  in  the 
several  counties  and  cities  in  the  district.  In  fixing  the  value  of 
the  real  estate  the  clerk  of  each  county  should  be  required  to 
make  out  a  list  of  the  sales  of  the  land  in  his  county  for  the  pre¬ 
ceding  year,  giving  the  number  of  acres  and  price,  and  upon  this 
information  and  such  other  as  could  be  procured  as  a  basis,  and 
taking  into  consideration  the  mountain,  swamp  and  other  waste 
land,  the  average  value  per  acre  of  the  land  in  the  several  counties 
should  be  determined.  This  plan  is  not  applicable  to  real  estate  in 
cities  and  towns,  the  valuation  and  equalization  of  which  must 
be  left  to  the  discretion  of  the  commissioners.  And  upon  such 
information  as  the  commissioners  in  the  several  districts  could  se¬ 
cure  by  personal  visits,  from  conference  with  commissioners  of 
the  revenue  and  leading  business  men  and  farmers,  and  from  other 
sources,  the  fair  average  selling  value  of  all  animals,  vehicles  and 
other  tangible  personal  property  in  counties  and  cities  should  be 
fixed,  and  a  report  made  showing  said  values.  When  the  reports 
from  all  the  districts  shall  be  ready,  a  commission  of  ten,  to  be 
known  as  the  General  Tax  Commission,  composed  of  one  man  from 
each  congressional  district  commission,  designated  by  the  appoint¬ 
ing  power,  should  meet  in  Richmond,  or  other  convenient  place, 
to  consider  the  reports  of  the  several  congressional  commissions, 
which  would,  as  soon  as  completed,  be  delivered  to  the  several  mem¬ 
bers  of  the  congressional  commissions  constituting  the  general  tax 
commissions,  who,  with  the  aid  of  the  Auditor  of  Public  Accounts, 
to  be  ex-officio  member  of  the  commission,  should  at  once,  and 
bringing  to  their  aid  all  possible  information,  go  over  the  said  re¬ 
ports  and  ascertain  the  fair  average  selling  value  of  all  the  real 
and  tangible  property  in  the  counties  of  the  several  districts,  and 
the  aggregate  value  of  the  real  estate  in  the  cities  and  towns,  of  the 
State,  and  determine  the  same  according  to  the  provisions  of  the 
Constitution.  The  General  Tax  Commission  should  embody  its 
findings  in  a  report,  the  original  of  which,  with  the  reports  of  the 
congressional  commissions,  should  be  filed  with  the  Auditor  of  Pub¬ 
lic  Accounts,  and  a  copy  of  the  general  report  filed  with  the  clerk 


[7] 


of  the  circuit  court  of  every  county  and  the  corporation  court  of 
every  city  in  the  State. 

Within  three  months  from  the  filing  of  the  said  copies  any 
ten  tax-payers  of  any  county  or  city  should  have  the  right  to  file  with 
the  clerk  in  whose  office  the  copy  of  the  report  is  filed,  a  written 
application  for  appeal  from  the  valuations  made,  serving  upon  the 
attorney  for  the  Commonwealth  of  the  county  or  city  a  copy  of 
said  application  at  least  fifteen  days  before  the  term  of  the  court 
or  the  day  of  such  term  fixed  in  the  application  for  the  trial  of 
the  appeal. 

At  the  trial  of  said  appeal  the  attorney  for  the  Commonwealth 
should  he  required  to  defend  the  application,  and  the  Attorney- 
General,  or  his  assistant,  whenever  deemed  necessary  by  the  Attor¬ 
ney-General,  or  required  by  the  General  Tax  Commission,  should 
appear  with  the  attorney  for  the  Commonwealth  of  the  county  or 
city.  The  appeal  should  be  tried  without  other  pleading  than  the 
application  and  the  answer  filed  by  the  Commonwealth’s  Attorney 
and  Attorney-General  or  his  assistant,  in  cases  in  which  either 
shall  appear,  upon  such  evidence  as  may  be  produced  by  either 
party,  and  the  report  be  confirmed  or  the  average  or  aggregate  values 
be  lowered  or  raised  by  the  court  according  to  the  right  of  the 
case.  From  the  decision  of  the  circuit  court  or  corporation  court 
the  applicants  or  the  Commonwealth  should  have  the  right  of 
appeal,  within  thirty  days,  to  the  Supreme  Court  of  Appeals,  upon 
the  evidence  submitted  to  the  trial  court,  which  should  be  taken 
down  and  certified  by  the  trial  judge  as  in  other  cases.  And  upon 
such  appeal  the  Supreme  Court  of  Appeals  shall  have  jurisdiction 
to  try  the  case  and  enter  such  order  confirming  the  report  as  made 
or  lowering  or  raising  values  as  may  seem  to  it  just  and  right,  and 
its  decision  shall  be  final  as  to  such  values,  except  improvements 
may  be  added  each  year  as  now  provided  for,  until  the  next  regular 
legal  assessment.  Every  such  appeal  shall  be  put  on  the  privilege 
docket  of  the  court,  shall  be  heard  and  disposed  of  as  speedily 
as  may  be,  at  the  next  term  of  the  court  after  the  appeal  wherever 
the  court  may  convene  and  without  regard  for  the  locality  from 
which  the  appeal  comes. 

After  the  average  value  of  the  land  and  tangible  personal  prop¬ 
erty  shall  have  been  fixed  as  aforesaid,  or  after  the  right  of  appeal 
shall  have  expired,  the  assessment  of  the  several  tracts  of  land 
and  tangible  personal  property  shall  be  made  as  now  provided 
by  law,  so  that  the  average  value  per  acre  of  land  and  the  average 
value  of  the  tangible  personal  property  as  fixed  by  the  reports  or 
as  determined  bv  the  courts  shall  be  maintained. 

After  the  valuations  have  all  been  made,  if  it  shall  appear  to 
the  Auditor  of  Public  Accounts  that  the  revenue  of  the  State  at  the 


[8] 


rate  of  taxation  fixed  by  law  will  exceed  by  more  than  two  hundred 
and  fifty  thousand  dollars,  which  is  about  the  natural  yearly  in¬ 
crease  on  account  of  improvements  of  real  estate,  the  receipts  for 
the  last  fiscal  year,  the  Auditor  of  Public  Accounts,  the  Second 
Auditor  and  the  Treasurer  should  be  constituted  a  commission 
to  lower  the  rate  of  taxation,  having  due  regard  to  the  amount  re¬ 
quired  by  the  Constitution  for  public  schools.,  so  as  to  provide 
a  revenue  adequate  to  the  needs  of  the  State,  but  not  to  exceed 
for  general  purposes  by  more  than  two  hundred  and  fifty  thousand 
dollars  the  amount  collected  the  previous  year,  unless  necessary  to 
meet  the  appropriations  made  by  the  Genera]  Assembly. 

It  is  believed  that  a  law  such  as  has  been  suggested  will  con¬ 
siderably  reduce  the  tax  rate  and  cure  in  an  equitable  way,  the 
principal  defects  in  our  tax  laws,  and  that  the  last  provision  will 
do  away  with  the  need  of  an  extra  session  of  the  Legislature,  the 
expense  of  which  will  more  than  cover  the  expense  of  the  tax  com¬ 
missions. 

It  should  be  understood  that  the  powers,  duties  and  compen¬ 
sations  of  the  congressional  district  commissions  will  expire  when 
the  assessments  made  by  them  shall  be  reported  to  the  General  Tax 
Commission,  and  that  the  powers,  duties  and  compensation  of  the 
General  Tax  Commission  shall  expire  whenever  the  reports  of  all 
the  cities  and  counties  shall  have  been  made  to  the  Auditor  of 
Public  Accounts  and  passed  upon  by  the  General  Commission  and 
the  courts,  or  the  time  for  appeal  shall  have  expired. 

After  the  aforesaid  assessment  has  been  made,  I  recommend 
the  appointment  of  a  permanent  tax  commission,  which  shall  be 
charged  with  the  duties  of  equalizing  assessments  and  generally 
supervising  all  the  officers  charged  with  the  duties  of  assessing  and 
collecting  taxes,  and  also  charged  with  the  power  and  duty  of  re¬ 
porting  for  removal  to  the  circuit  judge,  of  the  county  or  the  cor¬ 
poration  court  of  the  city,  any  of  the  local  officers  who  shall  fail 
to  discharge  their  duties.  Upon  such  report  the  judge  or  court 
should  cause  reasonable  notice  to  be  given  to  the  officer  reported, 
and  upon  its  return  should  try  the  complaint,  and  if  sustained  should 
remove  the  officer  and  appoint  his  successor. 

As  a  matter  of  pressing  need  and  in  the  best  interest  of  the 
Commonwealth,  I  recommend  the  immediate  passage  of  an  act, 
with  an  emergency  clause,  putting  a  nominal  tax  on  bank  deposits 
in  place  of  the  present  law.  If  this  is  not  done  before  the  com¬ 
mencement  of  the  tax  year,  the  withdrawal  of  such  deposits  may 
cripple  the  banks,  and,  through  them,  materially  interfere  with 
the  business  of  the  State.  Such  a  law  will,  in  my  opinion,  bring 
money  to  our  State,  and  contribute  to  its  prosperity.  But  a.  bet¬ 
ter  reason  for  a  nominal  tax  on  this  kind  of  property  is  that  almost 

[9] 


always  the  deposits  come  from  stocks,  bonds  or  other  property 
taxed,  or  constitutes  a  part  of  income  also  taxed,  and  is  simply 
placed  in  bank  for  safety  and  convenience  until  paid  out  into 
the  ordinary  course  of  business.  The  present  tax  is,  therefore,  un¬ 
just. 

In  this  connection,  however,  and  inasmuch  as  there  might  be 
book  changes  of  bonds,  notes,  taxable  stock,  and  other  evidences 
of  debt,  into  bank  deposits  in  order  to  evade  the  payment  of  tax, 
such  transfers  or  any  pretended  purchase  of  n  on-taxable  securities, 
or  purchase  to  evade  the  tax  laws  should  be  made  a  misdemeanor 
and  upon  conviction  the  offendor  should  pay  a  fine  equal  to  five 
times  the  amount  of  tax  he  endeavored  to  save,  and  should  also 
be  required  to  pay  the  said  tax. 

I  renew  my  recommendation  that  a  small  rate,  not  to  exceed 
fifty  cents  on  the  hundred  dollars,  of  which  thirty  cents  should  go 
to  the  county  or  city  and  twenty  cents  to  the  State,  be  placed  upon 
all  intangible  personal  property  and  be  the  only  tax,  either  State 
or  local,  to  be  assessed  on  this  class  of  property.  Where  this  plan 
has  been  tried,  as  in  Maryland  and  other  States,  it  has  worked 
well  and  added  largely  to  the  revenue  received  from  intangible 
personal  property. 

All  persons,  corporations  and  firms  paying  taxes  on  incomes 
to  the  Federal  government  should  be  required  to  furnish  the  com¬ 
missioner  of  his  county  or  city  with  a  copy  of  his  assessment  and 
the  Auditor  of  Public  Accounts  should  have  prepared  and  furnish 
to  all  tax-pavers  on  request  blank  forms  corresponding  with  those 
furnished  by  the  officers  of  the  general  government. 

It  might  be  well  to  change  the  method  of  taxing  public  service 
corporations,  but  this  is  a  matter  which  can  wait  until  others  more 
important  have  been  passed  upon. 

In  view  of  their  present  condition,  I  recommend  the  appoint¬ 
ment  of  a  commission  to  consist  of  a  lawyer,  the  Auditor  of  Public 
Accounts  and  a  commissioner  or  ex-commissioner  of  the  revenue, 
whose  duty  it  shall  be  as  soon  as  the  tax  policy  of  the  State  is 
fixed  to  carefully  go  over,  revise  and  codify  the  tax  laws  of  the 
State,  and  report  to  the  next  General  Assembly. 

It  is  sincerely  hoped  that  the  recommendations  of  this  mes¬ 
sage  may  meet  with  favorable  consideration  from  the  General 
Assembly.  - 

Message  of  Governor  William  Hodges  Mann,  January  11,  1912 

Herewith  I  transmit  to  the  Assembly  the  report  of  the  Special 
Tax  Commission  appointed  under  provisions  of  chapter  147,  Acts 
of  1910. 

In  forwarding  this  report  I  wish  to  call  attention  to  the  im¬ 
portance  of  the  work  undertaken  by  this  Commission  and  to  a 

[10] 


few  of  the  results  which  may  be  expected  to  follow  the  adoption 
of  its  recommendations. 

Heretofore  there  has  been  little  system  in  the  collection  of  the 
public  revenue.  As  occasion  has  demanded  and  as  new  revenue 
was  required,  our  tax  laws  have  been  changed  from  time  to  time; 
new  taxes  have  been  added;  new  sources  of  revenue  have  been 
discovered;  class  taxes  have  been  increased.  But  there  has  been 
no  general  policy  pursued  in  these  extensions  of  our  revenue  laws 
and  there  has  been  no  consistent  plan  developed.  As  a  result  our 
laws  are  at  present  in  great  confusion ;  many  taxes  are  unduly 
heavy  in  comparison  with  others;  in  some  instances  double  taxes 
have  been  levied;  the  whole  code  is  chaotic,  confused  and  unsatis¬ 
factory.  Moreover,  this  careless  treatment  of  our  tax  laws  has  been 
responsible  for  many  of  the  financial  difficulties  under  which  the 
Treasury  of  the  Commonwealth  has  labored  during  recent  years. 
Our  laws  have  been  so  uncertain  in  their  operation  and  so  con¬ 
flicting  in  their  character  that  it  has  been  impossible  to  estimate 
with  any  degree  of  accuracy  the  probable  receipts  of  the  State. 

In  addition,  our  tax  laws  have  fallen  into  public  disrepute. 
Our  people  have  realized  the  condition  of  our  code  and  have  felt 
that  our  laws  were  unjust  and  discriminating  in  character;  un¬ 
reasonable  and  unweildly  in  practice.  There  is  a  widespread,  in¬ 
deed  a  State-wide  clamor  for  a  comprehensive  and  thorough  re¬ 
vision  of  our  assessment  laws. 

It  was  to  meet  this  iust  demand  and  correct  these  deplorable 
conditions  that  the  Assembly  created  a  special  Tax  Commission 
at  its  last  session.  This  Commission,  of  which  I  have  had  the 
honor  to  be  chairman,  has  endeavored  to  discharge  its  duties  in  a 
full  appreciation  of  the  importance  of  the  work  undertaken,  and  in 
an  earnest  desire  to  give  to  the  Assembly  recommendations  which 
would  make  possible  a  general  and  satisfactory  revision  of  the 
law. 

I  unhesitatingly  recommend  the  finished  work  of  the  Commis¬ 
sion  to  the  favorable  consideration  of  the  General  Assembly,  and 
believe  that  its  adoption  at  the  present  session  of  your  honorable 
body  will  be  at  once  a  great  contribution  to  the  welfare  of  the 
people  and  a  marked  step  toward  the  establishment  of  a  stable 
equilibrium  in  the  financial  affairs  of  the  Commonwealth. 

I  wish  especially  to  emphasize  the  recommendation  of  the 
Commission  for  the  creation  of  a  permanent  tax  commission,  which 
shall  have  power  to  equalize  assessments.  The  recommendation 
the  Commission  regards  as  fundamental.  Heretofore  we  have  had 
no  central  administration  in  matters  of  taxation  and  have  left  to 
local  officers,  responsible  to  the  local  electorate,  the  collection  of 
about  40  per  cent,  of  the  revenue  of  the  Commonwealth.  The 

[111 


re- 


suit  lias  been  a  disregard  for  the  interests  of  the  State  and  an  in¬ 
equality  in  matters  of  taxation,  which  is  not  creditable  to  the  good 
name  of  Virginia.  The  Commission  made  an  exhaustive  exami¬ 
nation  of  the  systems  of  equalization  in  use  in  other  States  and 
reached  the  conclusion  that  a  system  of  horizontal  equalization,  such 
as  is  recommended  in  the  report,  was  the  only  system  feasible  at 
this  time.  If  the  plan  proposed  by  the  Commission  be  enacted 
into  law,  the  Commonwealth,  at  small  cost,  can  secure  the  equali¬ 
zation  of  real  and  personal  property  assessments  and  can  give  to 
every  citizen  the  assurance  that  he  is  paying  in  the  same  manner, 
at  the  same  rate  and  on  the  same  basis  as  other  citizens.  I  believe 
no  plan  can  be  found  more  productive  of  good,  and  requiring  so 
small  an  outlay  of  public  funds,  as  that  proposed  by  the  Com¬ 
mission.  ' 

The  restoration  of  equality  in  taxation  will  make  possible  a 
speedy  reduction  in  the  rate  of  the  State  tax.  Of  this  there  can 
be  no  doubt.  That  such  a  reduction  is  highly  desirable  and  is  due 
the  tax-pavers  of  the  State,  I  need  not  point  out  to  the  Assembly. 
A  tax  rate  of  twenty  cents  on  the  hundred  dollars  valuation  is 
easily  possible,  and  will  mean  new  immigration  and  additional 
capital  to  the  Commonwealth  and  new  prosperity  for  our  people 

I  wish  to  impress  upon  the  Assembly  the  importance  of  im 
mediate  favorable  action  upon  this  report.  Only  by  prompt  enact¬ 
ment  can  the  Assembly  hope  to  see  the  benefits  of  the  new  plan 
of  assessment  during  the  present  year.  A  few  weeks  delay  will 
prevent  the  assessment  of  personal  property  during  the  present  year 
under  the  plan  proposed  and  will  thus  deprive  the  Commonwealth 
of  revenue  properly  due,  while  it  will  postpone  the  date  at  which 
a  reduction  in  the  tax  rate  will  be  possible. 

I  regard  this  subject  as  of  paramount  importance.  Nothing 
more  vitally  affecting  the  interests  of  the  people  or  more  intimately 
connected  with  their  daily  life  can  be  made  the  subject  of  legal 
enactment.  The  recommendations  of  the  Commission,  which  I  re¬ 
gard  as  well-digested  and  most  feasible,  should  receive  prompt  ap¬ 
proval,  and  I  trust  will  be  adopted  as  a  whole,  leaving  to  experience 
the  discovery  of  and  the  remedy  for  any  defects  which  may  ap¬ 
pear. 

It  is  but  just  to  add  that  the  information  contained  in  the 
report  of  Dr.  Douglas  S.  Freeman,  Secretary  of  the  Commission, 
will  be  found  of  the  greatest  value.  He  has  carefully  examined  and 
digested  the  tax  laws  of  most  of  the  States  of  the  Union,  culled 
from  them  their  most  valuable  features,  and  drawn  his  own  con¬ 
clusions,  which  are  very  clearly  presented.  Dr.  Freeman  has  made 
himself  familiar  with  conditions  in  Virginia,  and  his  report  and 
tables  will  enable  the  General  Assembly  to  act  quickly  and  in- 

[12] 


telligentlv  on  the  bill  to  carry  into  effect  the  recommendations  of 
the  Special  Tax  Commission. 

I  think  it  well  in  this  connection  to  call  attention  to  certain 
congruous  matters,  which,  while  not  within  the  jurisdiction  of  the 
Special  Tax  Commission,  should  at  this  session  receive  the  attention 
of  the  General  Assembly. 

N” ow  that  the  treasurers  of  the  counties  are  permitted  by  law  to 
succeed  themselves,  the  cause  of  the  adoption  of  the  Constitutional 
provision,  which  still  exists,  should  be  removed  by  legislation. 

There  is  no  way  by  which  a  settlement  can  he  made  with  the 
county  treasurer  for  county  and  school  funds.  It  is  true  that  a 
settlement  can  be  made  and  a  balance  due  by  the  treasury  ascer¬ 
tained,  but  as  his  is  the  only  hand  authorized  to  receive  the  money, 
there  can  be  no  actual  payment  or  settlement.  I,  therefore,  recom¬ 
mend  that  the  treasurer  he  required  at  the  July  or  August  meet¬ 
ing  of  the  board  of  supervisors  of  his  county,  as  the  case  may  be, 
or  within  sixty  days  thereafter,  to  settle  his  accounts  with  the 
supervisors  for  that  year  as  required  by  section  862  of  the  Code. 
And  that  he  be  required  at  its  August  meeting  in  each  year  to 
settle  with  the  county  school  hoard,  which  settlement  should  be 
made  before  the  commissioner  of  accounts  of  his  county,  or  if  from 
any  cause  he  cannot  act,  before  some  competent  person  appointed 
by  the  judge  of  the  circuit  court  of  the  county,  who  shall  he  en¬ 
titled  to  a  reasonable  fee  out  of  the  fund.  And  if  a  balance  shall 
be  found  to  be  due  by  the  treasurer  it  shall  be  at  once  deposited 
in  some  bank  to  he  selected  by  the  board  of  supervisors,  if  county 
funds,  to  the  credit  of  said  board,  and  bv  the  county  school  board, 
if  school  funds,  to  the  credit  of  the  said  board,  the  money  due  to 
be  drawn  by  warrants  authorized  by  the  hoard  of  supervisors, 
signed  by  its  chairman  and  counter-signed  by  the  treasurer,  and 
the  school  funds  by  warrants  authorized  by  the  county  school 
board,  signed  by  the  division  superintendent  and  counter-signed 
by  the  treasurer. 

It  is  also  recommended  that  the  county  treasurer  be  required 
under  penalty  to  make  these  annual  settlements. 

In  this  connection  it  may  be  proper  to  add,  that  no  suffi¬ 
cient  provision  exists  for  the  collection  of  delinquent  taxes,  which 
now  amount  to  a  very  large  sum  of  money  due  to  the  State  and  the 
counties  and  cities.  It  is,  therefore,  recommended  that  an  act  be 
passed  requiring  the  clerk  of  every  city  and  county  to  place  all 
the  delinquent  tax  tickets  lodged  in  his  office  in  the  hands  of  the 
county  and  city  treasurers,  listing  the  same  and  taking  the  treas¬ 
urer’s  receipt  therefor,  and  for  which  adequate  compensation  to 
the  clerks  should  be  allowed.  The  treasurer  should  be  required  to 
add  the  amount  of  such  delinquent  taxes,  by  years  and  amounts, 

[13] 


to  current  tax  tickets,  so  that  the  last  ticket  will  contain  the  entire 
claim  of  the  State  against  the  tax-payer  for  taxes.,  which  should  he 
lien  on  all  his  personal  property  as  an  execution  now  is  and  on 
his  real  estate  as  delinquent  taxes  now  is. 

Provision  should  he  made  for  the  forwarding  of  tax  tickets 
to  place  of  residence  of  a  tax-payer  who  removed  from  the  county 
or  city  in  which  he  is  assessed  before  payment,  and  the  clerk  should 
be  required  to  keep  in  an  alphabetically  arranged  record  book  a 
list  of  the  delinquent  taxes  which  are  liens  on  real  estate,  but  the 
purchaser  of  land  should  not  be  required  to  look  back  of  or  be 
responsible  for  any  taxes  not  on  the  last  tax  ticket. 

The  county  treasurers  are  now  required  by  lawT  to  make  monthly 
settlements  with  the  Auditor  of  Public  Accounts,  thus  simplifying 
their  transactions  with  the  State  and  saving  possible  loss  by  failure 
of  banks  or  other  causes,  and  this  rule  should  be  made  to  apply  to 
clerk  of  courts,  now  required  to  settle  only  twice  a  year,  and  to 
all  other  officers  collecting  money  for  the  State.  Frequent  settle¬ 
ments  are  best  for  the  officers  and  the  State. 

The  recommendations  of  this  message  are  earnestly  commended 
to  the  favorable  consideration  of  the  General  Assembly. 


Message  of  Governor  William  Hodges  Mann,  March  9,  1910. 

“The  failure  of  Senate  bill  No.  71  in  the  House  on  yesterday 
requires  me  to  call  the  attention  of  the  General  Assembly  to  the  im¬ 
perative  need  of  some  method  for  the  equalization  of  taxes  in  the 
State.  Unless  a  plan  having  this  end  in  view  is  adopted  at  this 
session  of  the  Legislature,  the  greatest  inequality  will  exist,  and 
the  greatest  injustice  will  result  to  those  sections  in  which  assessors 
following  the  rule  established  by  the  Constitution  assess  the  land 
in  their  respective  districts  at  its  fair  market  value.  Under  the 
Constitution  the  assessment  of  this  year  will  be  the  basis  of  taxation 
until  1916,  and  the  importance  of  having  a  uniform  assessment 
throughout  the  State  can  not  be  over  estimated. 

“At  this  late  day  of  the  session  it  may  not  be  possible  to  adopt 
the  wisest  measure  of  equalization,  but  as  our  finances  will  be 
affected  for  five  years  and  our  plans  of  progress  halted,  I  am  confi¬ 
dent  that  the  wisdom  and  the  patriotism  of  the  General  Assembly 
is  equal  to  the  emergency,  and  that  a  measure  will  be  adopted  which 
will  result  in  great  good,  even  if  it  does  not  perfectly  meet  with  the 
views  of  all  of  the  people’s  representatives. 

“We  are  all  interested  in  the  welfare  and  progress  of  the  State, 
and  all  working  together  for  the  advancement  of  her  best  interests, 

[14] 


and  I  anl  sure  that  by  making  natural  concessions,  and  bv  giving 
and  taking  help,  one  from  another,  a  law  may  be  passed  which  will 
be  just  to  land  owners  and  meet  the  requirements  of  the  State.” 


Extracts  From  The  Message  of  Governor  Claude  A.  Swanson, 

January  12,  1910. 

For  the  purpose  of  State  taxation  there  exists  a  great  lack  of 
uniformity  in  this  Commonwealth.  Glaring  inequalities  present 
themselves  in  the  assessment  upon  both  real  and  personal  property. 
Counties,  cities  and  sections,  in  making  assessments  of  property  for 
taxation,  adopt  widely  different  proportions  of  cash  value.  Some 
assess  a  fair  cash  value,  others  three-fourths  of  the  cash  value,  others 
one-half  of  the  cash  value  and  some  less  and  some  more  than  this 
proportion.  This  lack  of  uniformity  occasions  a  great  injustice  and 
unfairness  in  the  payment  of  State  taxes,  and  should  he  promptly 
and  efficiently  corrected.  There  should  exist  a  State  authority  em¬ 
powered  to  remedy  these  evils  and  to  distribute  equally  the  burdens 
of  State  taxation.  Under  the  present  system  values  are  assessed 
entirely  by  local  authorities,  and  the  State  has  no  power  to  make 
corrections,  even  when  the  injustice  is  gross  and  apparent.  Com¬ 
munities  can  and  many  do  now  escape  a  fair  share  of  their  taxation 
by  low  assessments.  Others  realizing  the  extent  of  this  practice  and 
seeking  to  remedy  the  injustice,  adopt  themselves  very  low  valua¬ 
tions.  These  conditions  should  not  continue. 

After  considering  maturely  the  many  plans  proposed,  I  have 
concluded  that  the  State  can  in  a  very  simple,  direct  and  efficient 
way  correct  this  ‘great  evil.  Under  the  present  law  copies  of  the 
books  of  the  commissioners  of  revenue,  containing  the  yearly  assess¬ 
ments  of  personal  property,  and  copies  of  the  books  of  the  land 
assessors,  containing  the  assessment  of  real  estate,  are  sent  to  the 
Auditor.  From  these  are  estimated  the  taxes  due  the  State,  by 
city  and  county  treasurers.  If  a  law  should  be  passed,  requiring 
these  assessments  to  have  the  approval  of  the  State  Auditor  before 
they  become  operative,  the  existing  inequality  and  injustice  could 
be  substantially  corrected.  The  Auditor  could  determine  a  uniform 
proportion  of  cash  value  of  property,  real  and  personal,  to  be  as¬ 
sessed  for  the  purpose  of  State  taxation ;  when  this  rate  of  uniform 
valuation  was  violated  by  a  commissioner  of  the  revenue  or  land 
assessor,  so  that  he  could  not  approve  the  books,  then  the  Auditor 
should  be  directed  to  send  the  books  back  for  correction,  and  if 
not  properly  corrected  or  returned  within  a  certain  time  the  Auditor 

[15] 


should  be  authorized  to  make  the  assessment  for  State  taxes,  the 
same  to  be  as  effective  as  if  made  by  the  commissioner  of  revenue 
or  land  assessor,  with  the  privilege  of  persons,  feeling  themselves 
aggrieved,  having  the  same  corrected  in  the  court  of  the  county  or 
city  where  the  property  is  located,  precisely  as  under  the  present 
law. 

I  believe  this  would  be  very  effective  and  would  produce  sub¬ 
stantial  uniformity  within  the  State.  An  examination  of  present 
inequalities  clearly  disclose  that  they  consist  not  of  inequalities 
among  individuals  in  the  same  county,  city  or  section,  but  of  in¬ 
equalities  in  fixing  the  proportion  of  cash  value  in  the  different 
counties,  cities  and  sections.  This  would  be  eliminated  by  the 
Auditor  enforcing  a  uniform  percentage  of  cash  valuation  for  the 
entire  State.  The  very  fact  that  the  Auditor  would  have  to  approve 
the  assessments  would  induce  the  officers  to  make  them  just,  fair 
and  reasonable.  I  believe  this  would  be  so  effective  in  producing 
the  desired  results  that  the  authority  of  the  Auditor  would  have  to 
be  very  rarely  invoked. 

One  of  the  advantages  of  this  proposed  plan  is  that  it  utilizes 
one  of  our  best  organized  and  most  experienced  and  capable  depart¬ 
ments  of  State  government.  A  department  which  has  long  had  suc¬ 
cessful  control  of  such  matters  and  which  by  providing  for  a  small 
increase  of  force  could  most  effectively  and  satisfactorily  do  this 
work.  It  would  save  the  State  the  uncertainty  and  the  great  expense 
always  incident  to  the  creation  of  a  new  department.  It  would  leave 
to  local  officials  the  performance  of  this  work,  as  now  exists,  pro¬ 
vided  they  did  it  fairly  and  well.  Before  exercising  the  State  power 
the  local  authorities  would  be  given  the  opportunity  to  correct  anv 
inequalities.  Persons  aggrieved  by  State  assessments  could  obtain 
relief  promptly  in  their  home  courts.  This  proposed  plan  has  the 
advantage  of  being  simple,  direct,  inexpensive,  and  would  be  admin¬ 
istered  by  tried  and  trained  officials.  Much  of  the  information 
needed  already  exists  in  the  Auditor’s  office.  ITe  would  be  as  capable 
as  any  of  employing  when  needed,  competent  assistants.  If  enacted, 
I  believe  the  good  results  achieved  would  promptly  and  completely 
vindicate  its  effectiveness  in  producing  uniformity  of  taxation,  and 
obtaining  for  the  State  much  revenue,  of  which  she  is  now  unjustly 
deprived.  As  the  time  is  near  approaching  when  there  will  be  a  re¬ 
assessment  of  real  estate,  which  will  be  the  basis  of  taxation  for  the 
five  succeeding  years,  I  wish  to  urge  upon  the  General  Assembly  the 
imperative  necessity  of  legislating  upon  this  matter  at  this  session. 

There  exists  in  this  State  a  great  need  for  a  well-equipped  ac¬ 
counting  department.  All  the  different  departments  of  the  execu¬ 
tive  government,  all  the  various  State  institutions,  should  be  required 
to  settle  annually  with  this  department  and  have  their  books  and 

[16] 


accounts  completely  examined.  It  should  be  directed  when  necessary 
to  yisit  and  examine  the  accounts  and  books  of  persons  and  officials 
indebted  to  the  State,  and  see  that  their  accounts  are  properly  kept. 
And  that  the  amounts  due  the  State  are  fully  and  promptly  paid.  It 
should  he  authorized  to  prepare  a  proper  and  scientific  system  of 
bookkeeping  for  the  various  State  departments  and  institutions.  This 
department  could  be  most  beneficially  utilized  by  the  Governor  in 
making  examinations  of  the  condition  of  institutions,  which  are 
placed  by  law  under  his  supervision.  Its  services  would  also  be 
invaluable  to  the  joint  auditing  committee  of  the  House  and  Senate. 

There  is  much  other  important  work  that  readily  suggests  itself 
that  this  department  could  successfully  do.  I  would  recommend  that 
it  be  organized  with  an  accountant  and  an  assistant,  and  a  reason¬ 
able  appropriation  for  traveling  and  contingent  expenses.  If  it  should 
be  disclosed  that  a  larger  force  is  necessary  to  do  the  work  promptly 
and  efficiently,  this  can  be  provided  in  the  future.  Tt  is  wise  and 
economical  to  create  departments  to  do  the  immediate  pressing  work, 
and  let  them  increase  in  proportion  and  in  the  direction  that  expe¬ 
rience  shows  is  best  and  most  needed.  The  savings  and  benefits  that 
would  inevitably  come  to  the  State  from  this  source  would  far  excee 
the  small  expenditure  required. 


Extract  from  the  Message  of  Governor  A.  J.  Montague, 

January  13,  1904. 

The  new  sources  of  our  taxation  distinctly  contribute  to  the 
adjustment  of  the  burdens  of  government.  The  increased  revenue 
derived  from  corporate  property  is  very  gratifying.  The  equalizing 
of  taxation  has  become  an  almost  insuperable  difficulty ;  but  it  may 
be  affirmed  that  if  all  people  and  interests  share  equally  the  burdens 
of  government  our  tax  rate  could  be  greatly  reduced.  As  an  indica¬ 
tion  of  the  benefits  of  the  new  system,  it  should  be  observed  that 
though  as  yet  but  partially  tested,  and  at  a  reduced  rate,  our  present 
revenue  from  assessments  made  by  the  Corporation  Commission 
alone  will  exceed  that  of  last  year  bv  about  four  hundred  and  thirty- 
eight  thousand  dollars.  Our  income,  in  round  numbers,  will  approx¬ 
imate  four  millions  of  dollars  per  annum,  thus  demonstrating  the 
ability  of  the  commonwealth  to  meet  every  obligation,  and  to  pro¬ 
vide  for  improved  administration  in  many  departments.  Yet  af 
no  time  should  the  legislature  more  determinedly  practice  economy 
than  when  a  full  treasury  tempts  expenditure. 

While  taxation  is  a  source  of  unending  controversies  in  gov¬ 
ernment,  it  must  be  conceded  that  the  lower  the  rate,  consistent 

[171 


with  efficient  administration,  the  less  the  burdens  of  the  people. 
Therefore,  it  is  needful  that  the  State  expeditiously  proceed  in  the 
enlargement  of  the  sinking  fund.  Every  bond  purchased  saves  in¬ 
terest  and  thereby  an  equivalent  expenditure.  State  bonds  to  the 
amount  of  $1,111,500  are  now  impounded  in  this  fund.  These 
bonds  cannot  be  cancelled  because  there  is  no  authority  therefor. 
I  would  therefore  suggest  the  enactment  of  a  provision  for  the  can¬ 
cellation  of  all  present  and  future  holdings  until  they  are  reduced 
to  a  balance  not  exceeding  $300,000  at  any  one  time.  This  latter 
sum  is  an  ample  reserve  for  a  sale  or  hypothecation  if  public  exegen- 
cies  so  require;  a  larger  sum  invites  extravagance. 

The  Constitution  provides  that  “no  money  shall  be  paid  out  of 
the  State  treasury  except  in  pursuance  of  appropriations  made  by 
law;  and  no  such  appropriation  shall  be  made  which  is  payable  more 
than  two  years  after  the  end  of  the  session  of  the  general  assembly 
at  which  the  law  is  enacted  authorizing  the  same ;”  and  this  pro¬ 
vision  brings  us  face  to  face  with  a  danger  pointed  out  in  my  last 
message.  The  appropriation  act  expired  on  September  30th  last, 
and  from  that  date  to  this  hour  the  disbursements  for  the  support 
of  the  government  have  been  in  plain  violation  of  the  law.  The 
government  should  not  be  thus  forced  by  methods  so  unnecessary 
and  illegal,  and  I  am  therefore  constrained  to  repeat  my  former 
recommendation  for  a  change  of  date  of  the  term  for  which  appro¬ 
priations  should  commence,  thus  affording  a  remedy  at  once  simple 
and  complete. 


Extracts  From  Message  of  Governor  A.  J.  Montague, 
January  10,  1906. 

The  State  should  create  one  special  accountant,  to  inspect  and 
scrutinize  as  far  as  possible  the  accounts,  vouchers  and  methods  of 
bookkeeping  of  all  officials  at  the  seat  of  government  and  elsewhere 
in  the  State,  who  collect,  account  for  or  pay  out  public  moneys. 
Such  an  accountant,  if  selected  solely  for  his  experience  and  capacity, 
could  hardly  perform  all  of  the  duties  which  would  devolve  upon 
him,  but  we  could  at  least  make  a  beginning  of  a  work  so  much 
needed. 

Efficient  officials  would  desire  the  approval  and  inefficient  offi¬ 
cials  would  fear  the  disappoval  of  this  accountant,  the  public  profit¬ 
ing  in  either  event  by  the  examination.  This  system  obtains  in  the 
United  States  government,  and  perhaps,  in  some  of  the  States  of  the 
Union,  and  has  been  satisfactory  wherever  tried. 

The  assessment  of  revenues  is  a  delicate  and  difficult  task  under 


any  form  of  government;  but  manifestly  the  simplest  machinery 
for  this  work  is  preferable.  Some  years  since  the  State  created  offi¬ 
cials  called  examiners  of  record,  and  one  of  whom  in  each  judicial 
circuit  must  make  assessments  of  all  moneys,  bonds,  notes,  stocks 
and  every  species  of  personal  property  under  the  control  of  the  court, 
as  well  as  of  all  watercraft  over  five  tons  burden.  After  making 
these  valuations  the  examiners  of  record  report  them  to  the  com¬ 
missioners  of  revnue,  who  make  extensions  thereof  upon  their  books, 
the  State  paving  commissions  to  both  sets  of  officials.  There  is 
hardly  any  class  of  property  less  difficult  to  reach  and  assess  than 
that  in  question,  and  the  fact  that  the  State  should  have  paid  to  these 
examiners  of  record  alone  the  large  sum  of  one  hundred  and  eighty- 
two  thousand,  seven  hundred  and  seventy  dollars  ($182,770.67), 
and  sixty-  seven  cents  in  the  past  ten  years  for  work  which  could 
have  been  done  by  the  commissioners  of  revenue,  who  are  also  paid 
the  regular  fees  for  extending  these  valuations,  is  a  great  wrong 
upon  her  tax-payers.  I,  therefore,  advise  the  abolition  of  this  new 
and  unnecessary  office  and  the  reimposition  of  its  duties  upon  the 
commissioners  of  revenue  with  rigid  accountability  of  service. 

Comprehensive  civil  service  regulations  authorized  by  statute 
and  applicable  in  the  appointment  and  retention  of  all  clerks  in  the 
offices  of  the  treasury  department  would  be  a  beneficial  achieve¬ 
ment.  The  conduct  of  this  business  should  be  analogous  to  that  of 
safe  and  sound  banking  institutions.  A  system  of  civil  service 
should  also  be  extended  to  all  employes  of  the  penitentiary  and  in¬ 
sane  hospitals,  other  than  their  respective  superintendents  and  assist¬ 
ants,  and  to  the  police,  janitors,  conductors  of  elevators,  and  machin¬ 
ists  employed  in  the  seat  of  government.  The  selection  of  these 
officials,  as  well  as  their  tenure  of  office,  should  be  determined  wholly 
by  efficiency  and  character  and  removed  entirely  from  the  suspicion 
of  political  considerations.” 


Extract  from  the  Message  of  Governor  J.  Hoge  Tyler, 
January  1,  1902. 

The  proper  exercise  of  the  taxing  power  of  a  government  has 
always  been  the  most  difficult  of  all  its  functions.  Aside  from  the 
many  problems  connected  with  a  proper  adjustment  of  the  laws  of 
a  State  where  the  population  is  composed  of  citizens  who  are  en¬ 
gaged  in  a  variety  of  trades  and  business,  great  difficulty  has  always 
been  experienced  in  having  the  laws  enforced  so  they  will  bear 
on  all  the  citizens  even  in  the  manner  contemplated  by  their  framers. 
No  more  important  question  can  be  called  to  your  consideration 
than  the  laying  of  the  taxes  of  the  Commonwealth.  This  is  the  vital 
and  sensitive  question  which  puts  to  the  test  your  sense  of  justice, 

[19] 


and  calls  into  play  a  wise  and  equitable  provision  for  the  support 
of  the  government.  It  is  the  question  above  all  others  that  has 
caused  the  dissensions  and  wars  of  the  world,  and  has  been  used 
as  an  engine  of  oppression  and  favoritism  wherever  the  races  of 
men  have  been  least  enlightened.  Unjust  taxation  is  the  very  em¬ 
bodiment  of  tyranny,  while  just  and  proportionate  taxation  is  the 
product  of  the  highest  Christian  civilization.  I  beg  of  you  to  ap¬ 
proach  this  subject  not  lightly  nor  indifferently. 

One  fruitful  source  of  inequality  is  the  collection  of  taxes  from 
what  may  be  called  “invisible  property.”  From  the  very  nature 
of  this  class  of  property  the  collection  of  the  just  and  proper  tax 
is  largely  dependent  on  the  honesty  of  the  citizen,  and  where  this 
is  not  present  can  only  be  effectively  reached  by  the  enactment  of 
such  drastic  laws  that  the  honest  citizen  rebels  against  their  enforce¬ 
ment.  It  is  true  that  some  men,  otherwise  honest  and  correct,  seek 
to  justify  their  evasion  of  this  duty  to  their  State  on  the  ground 
of  the  low  rate  of  interest  derived  from  their  securities  and  the 
high  rate  of  taxes  imposed  for  State  and  municipal  purposes,  and 
also  in  some  instances  because  it  represents  some  visible  property 
which  has  already  been  taxed.  There  is  no  question  but  that 
those  men  who  belong  to  the  second  class  mentioned  have  grounds 
for  their  complaint,  and  it  is  the  duty  of  the  law-making  branch 
of  the  government  to  hear  their  complaints  and  grant  such  relief  as 
can  be  given,  and  after  this  has  been  done  the  position  that  they 
then  might  take  for  evasion  would  be  dishonest  and  untenable.  This 
is  especially  just,  because  the  holders  of  lands  and  other  visible 
property  have  no  redress,  even  though  their  property  does  not  yield 
sufficient  income  ,  to  meet  the  taxes  levied,  and  in  consequence  they 
seek,  or  are  charged  with  seeking,  to  evade  the  taxes  imposed  on 
them  by  resorting  to  means  to  have  them  assessed  below  their  true 
value.  I  mean  to  make  no  invidious  comparison  against  the  holders 
of  “invisible”  property  in  favor  of  the  owners  of  “visible,”  for 
human  nature  is  not  changed  by  the  character  of  the  property  owned. 
It  is  due  to  the  increased  opportunities  afforded  the  holders  of  in¬ 
visible  property  that  a  larger  number  of  this  class  evade  their  just 
taxation.  This  is  evidenced  by  the  great  discrepancy  between  the 
amount  of  “invisible  property”  returned  for  taxation  as  compared 
with  the  amount  of  “visible.”  How  to  adjust  these  inequalities  is 
indeed  a  problem,  and  while  this  is  a  subject  that  naturally  has 
received  the  attention  of  the  Constitutional  Convention,  and  in 
consequence  leaves  it  open  so  far  as  legislative  action  is  concerned, 
still  as  they  will  necessarily  leave  a  large  discretion  to  the  Legisla¬ 
ture,  I  deem  it  not  inappropriate  to  bring  this  matter  to  your  atten¬ 
tion. 

Another  most  perplexing  question  ever  disturbing  legislative 

[20] 


bodies  is  the  inequality  of  land  assessments.  This  is  largely  due 
to  the  fact  that  the  assessment  is  made  for  the  whole  State,  by  men 
of  each  county,  who,  even  though  they  were  perfectly  impartial  in 
their  judgment,  would  be  more  or  less  influenced  by  the  different 
views  which  they  take  of  the  desirability  of  a  high  assessment  and 
a  low  tax,  or  a  low  assessment  and  a  high  tax.  To  meet  this  con¬ 
dition,  or  at  least  to  remove  it  as  a  source  of  justification  for  the 
holders  of  “invisible”  property  for  failure  to  return  their  property, 
in  my  opinion  it  would  be  best,  when  the  constitutional  restrictions 
are  removed,  for  the  Legislature  to  arrange  for  sufficient  revenue 
to  be  derived  from  other  sources,  as  I  believe  it  can  be,  to  meet  the 
expenses  of  government,  and  cease  to  tax  real  estate  for  State  pur¬ 
poses,  and  leave  this  class  of  property  to  counties  and  cities  in  which 
they  are  situated  as  the  sources  from  which  to  derive  their  revenue. 
In  this  way  alone  I  believe  the  question  of  adjusting  the  inequalities 
of  assessment  which  now  exists  in  different  portions  of  the  State 
may  be  remedied.  The  reasons  for  the  desirability  of  this  change  are 
so  manifest  that  they  need  hardly  be  stated.  In  the  first  place,  even 
though  it  left  the  lands  unequally  assessed  in  the  different  coun¬ 
ties  of  the  State,  as  they  are  now,  still  it  would  remove  all  grounds 
of  complaint  on  this  score  because  the  revenues  of  the  State  would 
be  in  no  way  affected. 

There  are  other  reasons  of  great  force  that  can  be  urged  in 
favor  of  this  system;  among  them  might  be  stated  that  it  would 
cause  the  real  estate  to  be  assessed  at  an  amount  nearer  its  true 
value  in  all  the  counties  and  cities  of  the  State. 

While  on  this  subject  of  taxation  attention  is  naturally  drawn 
to  that  imposed  on  the  railroads  and  other  corporations  of  the  State, 
for  while  all  good  citizens  recognize  the  great  public  benefits  de¬ 
rived  from  the  encouragement  and  development  of  their  railroads 
and  other  corporations,  and  no  one  in  the  State  is  more  willing 
than  myself  to  lend  them  every  assistance  to  promote  their  welfare, 
yet  experience  has  demonstrated  that  by  reason  of  the  great  power 
that  they  have  the  capacity  to  exercise  in  the  political  affairs  of 
the  country,  there  is  a  danger  of  a  constant  tendency  on  their  part 
to  avoid  their  just  proportion  of  the  burdens  of  government.  They 
enjoy  great  privileges  and  possess  rights  not  common  to  the  in¬ 
dividual  citizen,  and  in  consequence  should  be  required  to  return 
to  the  State  a  just  share  of  the  expenses  of  government,  based  on 
the  value  of  their  property  as  well  as  on  the  value  of  the  franchise 
or  privileges  that  has  been  given  them  by  the  State. 


Extract  from  Inaugural  Address  of  Governor  Charles  T. 
O’Ferrall,  January  1,  1894. 


Taxes  imposed  upon  the  people,  whether  directly  or  indirectly, 
should  he  limited  strictly  to  the  necessary  demands  of  the  govern¬ 
ment,  economically  and  prudently  administered,  and  when  levied 
for  any  other  purpose,  or  in  a  spirit  of  profligacy  or  extravagance, 
it  is  robbery  under  the  forms  of  law.  Excessive  taxation,  sftffiktg 
t^io  substance  of-~the-people,  except  to  supply  the  real  wants  of  the 
government,  whether  done  by  State  or  national  authority,  is  a 
crime — a  crime  .against^  the^Constitution^  State  .or-  federal,  against 
right,  against  honesty,  against  conscience,  against  every  home,  every 
fireside,  and  every  man,  whatever  he  his  vocation.  Of  course,  it 
bears  most  heavily  upon  the  laboring  man,  for  often  at  best  his 
struggle  is  hard  to  keep  the  wTolf  from  his  door,  and  besides  when 
the  vrages  of  the  wage  earner  is  withdrawn  from  him,  general  stag¬ 
nation  and  depression  follow^  just  as  the  draining  of  the  blood  from 
the  human  body  brings  the  chill  and  paralysis  of  death. 

The  State  debt,  with  its  Pandora’s  box  of  evils  has  fortunately 
been  adjusted  upon  terms  acceptable  to  the  creditors  and  honorable 
to  the  State,  and  never  again  will  it  return  to  plague  us  or  to 
threaten  us  with  the  increased  burdens  or  the  diversion  from  their 
rightful  channel  of  the  revenues  intended  for  the  education  of  the 
children  of  the  State. 

In  my  opinion  the  present  rate  of  taxation  upon  property  can 
soon  he  reduced.  The  rapid  advancement  of  values  in  many  direc¬ 
tions,  the  great  strides  we  are  making  in  our  material  development, 
the  blaze  of  industries  lighting  up  our  gorges,  the  hum  of  machinery 
and  the  lumberman’s  axe,  breaking  the  stillness  of  our  primeval 
forests  and  craggy  recesses,  the  miners  pick  unearthing  the  black 
diamond  and  jetty  coal  vein,  the  whistle  of  the  locomotive  convert¬ 
ing  quiet  and  gloom  into  life  and  cheerfulness,  all  open  up  before 
us  a  prospect  so  bright  that,  taken  in  connection  with  important 
reforms  and  reductions  which  have  been  proposed,  leads  me  to  hope 
and  believe  that  before  the  close  of  the  next  four  years  the  condition 
of  our  treasury  will  justify  the  legislature  in  lessening  the  rate  of 
taxation  upon  real  estate  and  personal  property  with  advantage  to 
the  taxpayer  and  without  injury  to  any  interest,  keeping  faith  with 
our  creditors  and  meeting  promptly  all  our  obligations. 


Special  Message  of  Governor  P.  W.  McKinney, 
December  12,  1893. 

Taxation . 

There  is  no  subject  of  legislation  more  difficult  to  adjust  than 
taxation.  There  is  no  debt  due  by  the  citizen  which  he  pays  with 
such  reluctance,,  and  there  is  no  duty  which  he  will  endeavor  to 
avoid  like  the  payment  of  taxes  to  the  government.  He  seems  to 
forget  that  life  would  be  at  the  mercy  of  the  murderer,  and  property 
would  be  but  a  prize  to  him  who  would  take  it,  but  for  the  protection 
which  the  government  affords.  Without  it  life  would  be  so  uncer¬ 
tain,  and  property  so  insecure,  that  they  would  be  burdens,  not  bless¬ 
ings.  It  is  strange  that  when  demand  is  made  for  taxes  necessary  to 
support  the  government,  which  protects  both  life  and  property,  the 
citizen  will  so  often  place  obstructions  in  the  way  of  their  collection, 
and  pay  the  assessments  against  him  with  a  protest. 

Hothing  which  a  legislative  body  does  is  examined  so  closely 
and  occasions  so  much  criticism  as  a  tax  bill.  To  take  what  is  neces¬ 
sary  for  the  general  good,  that  which  belongs  to  the  individual,  is 
one  of  the  prerogatives  of  a  sovereign  State,  and  however  just  it 
may  be,  often  leaves  in  the  mind  of  the  citizen  a  disagreeable  feeling 
that  he  has  been  robbed  of  what  belongs  to  himself,  for  the  benefil 
of  others.  *  This  has  been  a  prolific  cause  of  dispute  between  the  peo¬ 
ple  and  the  government  in  most  of  their  controversies,  and  often 
causes  the  downfall  of  parties.  It  is  prudent,  therefore,  not  to  lose 
sight  of  these  facts,  but  require  that  the  laws  which  relate  to  the  as¬ 
sessment  and  collection  of  taxes  should  be  often  reviewed,  so  that  all 
injustice  may  be  promptly  corrected,  and  no  real  cause  of  complaint 
be  allowed  to  remain  uninvestigated. 

Our  Constitution  declares  that  “all  property,  both  real  and 
personal/7  shall  be  taxed  in  proportion  to  its  value.  “Ho  one  species 
of  property  shall  be  taxed  more  than  any  other  species  of  equal 
value,  and  the  value  shall  be  ascertained  as  prescribed  by  law.77 
(See  Constitution  of  Virginia,  article  X.,  section  1.) 


How  is  the  Amount  and  Value  of  Real  Property  to  be  Ascertained  f 

To  ascertain  the  amount  is  easy  enough ;  the  county  records 
will  show  the  amount  of  the  real  estate  subject  to  taxation.  To 
ascertain  the  value  is  difficult.  The  Constitution  declares  that  the 
value  is  to  be  ascertained  as  prescribed  by  law.  The  statute  (Code 
of  Virginia,  section  44,  page  87)  declares  that  the  assessor  shall 
“examine,  ascertain,  and  assess  the  cash  value  thereof.77  ITow  do 

[23] 


you  ascertain  the  cash  value?  There  is  no  rule  laid  down  for  his 
guidance  in  this  delicate  and  difficult  duty.  Each  assessor  exer¬ 
cises  his  own  judgment  as  to  the  proper  manner  of  ascertaining 
the  values  in  the  various  counties  and  cities  in  the  Commonwealth. 
It  must  necessarily  he  tilled  with  errors,  with  the  usual  differences 
of .  opinion  which  attend  all  questions  submitted  to  so  many  dif¬ 
ferent  officials,  all  at  liberty  to  select  their  own  grounds  for  the 
basis  of  their  judgment,  and  it  is,  therefore,  impossible  that  the 
assessment  could  be  uniform  and  just.  One  will  say  that  the  cash 
value  should  he  determined  by  what  the  property  will  bring  on 
the  market  for  cash.  How  could  that  be  an  unerring  test,  when, 
perhaps,  the  property  has  not  been  sold  for  many  years,  and  various 
changes  may  have  taken  place  seriously  affecting  its  value  ?  Another 
may  say  that  a  better  way  to  ascertain  the  value  according  to  the 
income  derived  from  it.  This  also  would  often  be  inaccurate,  be¬ 
cause  it  would  necessarily  depend  on  the  industry,  intelligence  and 
business  habits  of  the  owner.  The  same  property  under  the  man¬ 
agement  of  one  person  might  return  a  handsome  remuneration, 
wffiile  in  the  hands  of  another  bring  its  owner  into  debt.  It  is  diffi¬ 
cult  to  prescribe  a  rule  which  will  always  be  correct.  At  the  last 
assessment,  in  1890,  there  was  considerable  change  in  the  value  of 
real  estate  in  various  portions  of  the  State,  which  has  occasioned 
comment,  and  some  uneasiness  as  to  the  result  of  the  next  assess¬ 
ment,  in  1895.  If  the  parts  of  the  State  which  did  not  reduce  their 
assessments  shall  undertake  to  reduce  them  then,  as  some  did  in 
1 890,  it  may  make  an  increase  of  the  rate  of  taxation  necessary. 
These  are  some  of  the  difficulties  of  properly  ascertaining  the  value 
of  real  estate. 

How  It  Should  Be  Assessed. 

Property  ought  to  be  assessed  at  its  selling  value  at  volun¬ 
tary  sale,  not  at  forced  sale  or  auction  sale,  and  not  for  cash.  Who 
sells  real  estate  in  that  way  ?  To  sell  for  cash  is  to  sacrifice  by  sell¬ 
ing  at  much  less  than  its  real  value,  when  the  Constitution  says  no 
land  shall  he  assessed  above  or  below  its  value.  When  an  officer 
begins  to  speculate  as  to  what  real  estate  would  bring  in  the  market 
in  this  unusual  mode  of  selling,  it  is  guessing  at  what  should  be 
a  stern  reality.  IIow  much  land  is  there  in  Virginia  which  could 
not  be  sold  at  any  price  for  cash !  How  little  there  is  which  could 
he  sold  for  even  a  fair  price  for  cash  ?  Shall  all  this  be  relieved 
from  taxation,  which  has  no  cash  value?  The  statute  should  be 
changed  in  this  respect,  and  the  assessment  should  be  tested  by  what 
the  property  would  bring  sold  in  the  usual  way,  and  upon  the  usual 
terms  for  selling  real  estate  in  the  particular  locality  in  which  it  is 


situated.  In  some  places  property  is  assessed  at  two-thirds  of  its 
value.  If  this  was  uniformly  done  there  would  be  no  injustice  in 
this  reduction ;  but  this  is  not  the  case.  The  assessor  having  aban¬ 
doned  the  standard  required  by  the  law,  is  without  guide,  and  sub¬ 
ject  to  the  passions  of  the  importunate  tax  payer,  who  all  the  time 
will  pull  downward.  The  desire  of  each  locality  to  avoid  the  pay¬ 
ment  of  an  undue  proportion  of  the  State  tax  is  sufficient  to  explain 
the  tendency  to  low  assessments. 

How  to  Arrest  This  Alleged  Inaccuracy  in  Assessments. 

There  are  various  suggestions.  One  is  to  have  a  hoard  of  equali¬ 
zation  to  take  the  values  from  various  parts  of  the  State  and  change 
them  in  such  a  way  as  to  more  fully  carry  out  the  provisions  of  the 
Constitution,  which  declares  that  real  estate  shall  not  be  assessed  at 
more  or  less  than  its  fair  value.  This  suggestion  carries  with  it 
the  censure  of  the  county  officials,  whose  duty  it  is  to  make  the 
assessments,  and  implies  that  assessors  from  other  parts  of  the  State 
could  be  better  relied  on  for  a  true  valuation  than  those  immedi¬ 
ately  interested.  This  has  been  tried  in  New  York  and  several 
other  States.  To  avoid  injustice,  it  has  been  proposed  as  a  remedy, 
to  give  over  to  the  counties  for  taxation  for  county  purposes  the 
real  estate,  and  let  the  State  take  all  other  subjects  of  taxation  for 
the  support  of  the  government.  Then  each  county  may  assess  such 
a  value  on  its  real  estate  as  it  desires,  and  thus  the  State  will  avoid 
this  difficult  and  delicate  question  of  equalization. 

Another  suggestion  is  for  the  legislature  to  assess  counties  ac¬ 
cording  to  population  and  the  value  of  their  property,  and  let  each 
county  raise  the  money  by  a  tax  imposed  on  that  property  which 
can  best  hear  it,  and  which  will  he  less  burdensome  to  its  people. 
These  suggestions  show  the  difficulty  which  surrounds  this  entire 
question.  The  legislature  should  consider  it  deliberately,  and  adopt 
a  remedy. 

To  Ascertain  the  Amount  of  Personal  Property. 

This  is  also  difficult,  because  it  is  so  easily  concealed.  It  is 
less  difficult,  however,  to  ascertain  its  value  when  discovered,  than 
real  estate,  because  it  so  frequently  changes  hands  by  sale  or  ex¬ 
change,  and  this  can  he  used  as  a  fair  criterion  for  the  ascertain¬ 
ment  of  its  value. 

To  Ascertain  the  Value  of  Personal  Property. 

This  also  puzzles  legislators.  Different  plans  have  been  tried 
in  various  States  and  countries.  It  would  make  this  message  tec 


long  for  me  to  discuss  all  the  devices  used.  It  is  estimated  by  those 
best  informed  on  the  subject  that  on  a  fair  assessment  of  all  the 
personal  property  it  would  he  about  equal  in  value  to  real  property. 
This  proposition  has  been  discussed,  and  the  fact  admitted  by  a 
number  of  the  governors  of  the  State,  in  their  messages,  and  by 
many  of  the  best  writers  upon  this  subject.  One  of  them  says,  “It 
is  reasonable  to  believe,  if  our  present  tax  laws  were  reformed  and 
placed  on  some  true  and  consistent  theory,  the  assessment  of  per¬ 
sonal  property  will  nearly  equal  the  assessment  of  the  realty,  and 
thereby  the  present  unjust  burdens  on  real  estate  would  be  greatly 
reduced.” 

The  assessors  in  Hew  York  recently  reported  to  the  legislature 
that  personal  property  is  assessed  at  an  average  of  less  than  10  per 
cent,  of  its  nominal  value,  and  that  the  value  of  personal  propertv 
in  the  State  of  Hew  York  equals,  if  it  does  not  exceed  the  value  of 
the  real  estate. 

If  the  tax  valuation  of  personal  property  of  the  whole  country 
were  to  be  consulted  for  the  purpose  of  ascertaining  its  financial 
condition,  it  would  be  found  to  he  rapidly  rushing  towards  bank¬ 
ruptcy.  From  1870  to  1880  the  census  returns  show  that  the  as¬ 
sessed  valuation  of  the  personal  property  of  the  United  States  de¬ 
creased  one  million  and  a  quarter,  and  from  1880  to  1890  the  de¬ 
crease  was  even  greater  ;  the  real  estate  increasing  during  the  same 
period  more  than  five  billions,  while  the  fact  is  conceded  that  the 
value  of  real  estate  and  personal  property  increases,  as  a  rule,  pari 
passu.  This  apparent  declination  in  the  value  of  personal  estate 
is  due  to  defective  assessments — the  officers  not  being  able  to  find 
what  is  the  amount  and  value  of  investments  made  in  stocks,  bonds, 
notes,  etc.,  and  in  invisible  property  of  various  kinds.  This  decline 
seems  to  be  generally  admitted  to  he  apparent  and  not  real. 

How,  so  defective  is  our  law,  and  so  badly  is  it  executed,  that 
the  real  estate  is  assessed  (February  1,  1892,)  at  $300,717,366, 
and  the  personal  property  (February  1,  1892,)  at  $95,868,081.  Real 
estate  pays  $1,206,500  of  the  tax,  and  personal  property  pays 
$384,011,  because  of  the  failure  to  obtain  the  true  amount  and  value 
of  the  personal  property  in  the  State.  Many  have  favored  relieving 
personal  property  from  taxation  because  of  this  difficulty.  This 
should  not  be  done,  because  it  is  rewarding  the  dishonesty  of  the 
tax-payer  who  fails  to  give  in  a  true  list  of  his  property ;  it  is  doing- 
just  what  he  is  striving  for — to-wit,  the  release  of  what  he  owns 
from  bearing  a  just  proportion  of  the  public  burden.  If  this  was 
done,  a  difficulty  equally  as  great  would  at  once  be  encountered 
in  assessing  satisfactorily  the  value  of  real  estate,  when  heavily  in¬ 
creased  burdens  shall  be  placed  upon  it  to  compensate  for  the  loss 
to  the  State  in  releasing  personal  property  from  taxation. 

[26] 


Taxation  of  Incomes. 


After  a  reasonable  tax  has  been  imposed  on  real  estate  and 
personal  property  there  should  be  a  fair  tax  placed  on  incomes. 
This  will  be  a  varying  tax,  dependent  upon  the  success  of  the  peo¬ 
ple  in  their  business  during  the  year.  Income  tax  will  vary,  be¬ 
cause  it  depends  on  business  success.  It  should  be  used  to  meet 
the  deficiency  in  the  amount  of  taxes  necessary  for  government 
purposes,  after  a  reasonable  tax  on  property  has  been  assessed.  It 
is  said  by  some  that  taxes  should  only  be  assessed  on  visible  prop¬ 
erty;  that  to  tax  incomes,  which  are  invisible,  must  be  unjust,  be¬ 
cause  you  cannot  correctly  assess  what  you  have  not  seen.  To  ex¬ 
amine  into  what  a  man  has  makes  it  inquisitorial,  therefore  both 
unpopular  and  improper.  This,  I  think,  is  a  grave  mistake.  It 
ip.  not  unpopular,  but  is  growing  in  favor,  and  is  urged  by  a  large 
proportion  of  the  people.  It  is  becoming  a  source  of  revenue  in 
many  of  the  States,  and  has  been  for  years  used  as  a  means  of 
revenue  in  England  and  other  countries  in  Europe.  In  1842  it 
was  adopted  in  England  as  a  temporary  measure  to  relieve  trade 
and  commerce  from  the  trammels  by  which  they  were  bound.  It 
was  imposed  for  four  years,  but.  so  well  did  it  serve  the  purpose  of 
revenue  that  the  government,  after  a  fair  trial,  finally  determined 
to  keep  it  as  a  permanent  part  of  the  English  financial  system. 
To  assess  it,  was,  for  a  time,  the  cause  of  trouble  and  complaint, 
but  experience  has  enabled  the  officers  to  ascertain  this  source  of 
revenue  with  as  near  an  approximation  to  justice  as  any  other.  It 
is  unpopular  with  a  certain  class  of  people  who  desire  to  avoid  a 
fair  proportion  of  the  burdens  of  government  by  investing  their 
means  in  a  way  to  escape  taxation  more  readily  than  they  could 
if  invested  in  visible  property.  This  is  unjust  to  property  owners. 
The  capitalists  whose  wealth  consists  of  invisible  property  are  as 
much  benefited  by  the  government  in  being  protected,  thus  enabling 
them  to  make  their  incomes,  and  in  their  enjoyment  of  them,  as 
those  who  own  visible  property,  which  cannot  escape  the  attention 
of  the  assessors.  Their  investments  in  property  not  taxable  by  the 
State,  because  they  cannot  be  ascertained,  prevent,  investments  in 
visible  property  which  can  be  easily  discovered,  and  thus  the  de¬ 
cline  from  year  to  year  of  this  kind  of  property.  It  cannot  be 
fairly  denied  that  no  tax  is  so  just.  The  only  trouble  is  the  diffi¬ 
culty  in  properly  fixing  the  amount  of  the  income.  Certainly  the 
good  citizen  who  is  willing  to  bear  his  proportion  of  the  taxes  does 
not  complain.  He  is  willing  to  give  a  fair  statement  of  what  he 
owns  for  assessment.  The  man  who  complains  is  the  one  who  will 
resist  a  fair  assessment  of  his  income.  He  ought  not  to  be  re- 


127] 


garded,  because  he  enjoys  the  blessings  of  the  government,  and  is 
unwilling  to  bear  the  burdens  which  are  imposed  on  other  citizens. 
I  trust  this  class  is  neither  numerous  nor  influential  in  the  Com¬ 
monwealth.  The  property  tax  is  often  a  hard  one ;  it  is  inexorable. 
It  must  be  paid  whether  the  property  has  yielded  revenue  to  its 
owner  or  not.  It  is  often  the  case  that  the  merchant  pays  his  taxes, 
which  he  could  not  anticipate,  have  overtaken  him  after  his  assess¬ 
ment  has  been  made,  and  when  the  tax-gatherer  comes  he  pays  his 
dues  out  of  an  almost  empty  cash  drawer.  The  farmer,  whose 
property  was  assessed  years  before,  it  may  be,  has  sustained  a 
heavy  loss,  occasioned  by  the  act  of  God,  which  he  could  not  have 
anticipated  nor  provided  against — in  the  way  of  a  drought  or 
storm — the  result  of  which  was  not  only  the  loss  of  his  income 
from  his  yearly  work,  but  creates  a  debt  for  the  labor,  and  the  ex¬ 
pense  of  cultivating  his  land,  and  which  he  has  no  means  to  pay, 
except  by  involving  both  his  real  and  personal  estate,  and  yet  his 
taxes  are  not  abated,  and  he  must  meet  them.  It  is  often  merciless. 
It  exacts  as  much  in  the  year  of  disaster  to  the  citizen,  who  is 
struggling  to  keep  his  head  above  water,  as  in  a  year  of  unmeasured 
prosperity,  whereas  the  income  tax  only  exacts  much  when  fortune 
has  been  kind,  and  has  blessed  him  with  a  bounteous  hand.  It  im¬ 
poses  heavy  burdens  only  on  strong  shoulders ;  where  it  can  be  borne 
without  a  struggle,  and  it  should  be  received  without  a  murmur. 
It  is,  in  my  judgment,  the  fairest  tax  ever  devised.  The  possession 
of  large  property  does  not  always  imply  an  ability  to  pay  heavy 
taxes.  The  amount  of  taxes  should  generally  be  governed  by  the 
income  derived,  even  when  assessed  on  property  values.  The  in¬ 
come  tax  spares  the  business  man  in  seasons  of  disaster,  and  helps 
him  to  weather  the  storm,  but  asks  a  return  for  the  consideration 
shown  in  days  of  increasing  prosperity.  It  is  not  unjust  or  unwise 
to  exact  a  fair  tax  from  every  citizen.  It  has  a  tendency  to  make 
him  feel  an  interest  in  the  government.  He  looks  after  the  men 
who  make  its  laws;  he  does  not  become  indifferent,  as  they  do  who 
feel  that  their  prosperity  is  of  such  a  character  that  the  law  can¬ 
not  affect  it,  and  do  not  care  whether  the  tax  is  high  or  low.  In  all 
places  where  the  intelligent  and  the  virtuous  citizens  take  no  in¬ 
terest  in  government,  there  will  be  unwise  legislation  and  unjust 
laws;  so  form  your  laws  as  to  make  all  feel  an  interest,  and  the 
vigilance  of  the  people  will  then  require  wise  legislation  and  just 
enforcement. 

Is  An  Income  Tax  Inquisitorial ? 

How  can  you  find  out  ivhat  a  man  has  for  taxation  without  in¬ 
quiry  ?  How  would  you  know  what  to  tax  the  merchant,  the  lawyer, 
the  physician,  the  distiller  ?  The  tariff  is  inquisitorial,  too.  When 
a  citizen  returns  home  from  abroad  his  baggage  is  searched.  Skilled 

[28] 


detectives,  male  and  female,  are  in  the  custom  house  to  open  the 
trunks  of  all,  and  even  examine  their  persons,  fearing  that  some¬ 
thing  may  escape  being  taxed,  but  no  one  urges  this  as  any  objec¬ 
tion  to  the  tariff.  Hogs,  horses,  cattle,  household  and  kitchen  fur¬ 
niture,  are  all  taxed  according  to  their  value.  How  can  you  dis¬ 
cover  the  property  and  ascertain  its  value,  except  by  inquiry?  If 
you  were  to  release  from  taxation  all  property  which  could  not  he 
discovered,  except  by  diligent  inquiry,  I  fear  the  revenues  of  the 
State  would  soon  fall  far  short  of  the  demands  upon  its  resources. 

How  Should  Income  Be  Ascertained f 

This  is  a  matter  which  must  be  diligently  inquired  into,  and 
a  law  should  be  framed  after  the  results  and  experiences  in  other 
States  and  countries  have  been  carefully  examined.  There  are 
many  modes  of  discovering  incomes.  One  is  to  make  an  examina¬ 
tion  of  the  tax-payer  under  oath,  and  not  to  allow  a  man  to  make 
his  own  assessment.  Some  of  the  States  require  the  oath  of  the 
officer  to  each  assessment.  Another  plan  is  to  allow  the  officer  to 
make  assessments,  and  if  the  tax-payer  is  not  satisfied,  he  can  appeal, 
and  show  the  assessment  is  erroneous.  Another  is  to  have  a  special 
grand  jury  examine  and  say  what  would  be  a  fair  assesment  of  the, 
income  of  each  man  who  excepts  to  the  assessment  made  by  the 
officer. 

The  difficulty  has  been  exaggerated,  and  the  failure  to  get  a 
correct  return  is  due  in  a  great  part  to  the  negligence  of  the  com¬ 
missioner  of  the  revenue,  and  if  some  penalty  was  attached  to  his 
failure  to  do  his  duty,  commensurate  with  the  importance  of  the 
subject,  I  am  sure  that  the  increase  of  revenue  from  this  source 
would  he  great. 

o 


Corporations. 

Corporations,  as  well  as  individuals,  should  pay  a  fair  income 
tax,  and  when  a  reasonably  graded  income  tax  has  been  required 
of  all,  it  would  not  he  heavy  for  those  who  have  it  to  pay,  and  yet 
it  would  relieve  people  and  property  of  an  onerous  burden.  Some, 
complaining  of  taxes,  say  they  are  too  high.  This  complaint  is  not 
unreasonable  in  many  cases.  Many  tax-payers  surrender  to  the 
officer  all  of  their  property  with  a  fair  valuation  imposed  upon  it. 
To  such  it  is  a  burden,  because  they  pay  more  than  a  fair  share, 
as  so  much  property  goes  untaxed,  and  some  not  sufficiently  taxed; 
hut  a  fair  assessment  upon  all  will  lighten  the  burden  and  make 
the  tax  easy.  This  is  what  I  am  laboring  for;  it  will  make  the 
people  contented,  and  their  burdens  equal  and  light.  We  have  in 

[29] 


4 


this  State  enough  wealth,  if  fairly  assessed,  to  reduce  greatly  the 
rate  of  taxation,  and  with  a  conservative  and  economical  adminis¬ 
tration  of  the  affairs  of  the  State,  have  all  the  means  we  need  to 
support  the  schools  and  colleges,  to  pay  the  expenses  of  government 
and  the  interest  on  the  public  debt;  and  to  give  a  reasonable  pension 
to  every  one  of  our  disabled  soldiers.  But  to  do  this  you  must  reach 
the  untaxed — because  undiscovered — resources  of  the  State,  and  see 
to  it  that  a  fair  assessment  is  placed  upon  their  values,  and  your  tax, 
from  being  among  the  highest  imposed  in  any  of  the  States,  may 
be  reduced  to  about  the  lowest. 

What  Income  Should  Be  Taxed . 

All  income  should  he  taxed,  to  preserve  the  principle,  but  it 
should  be  merely  nominal  until  you  reach  six  hundred  dollars. 
After  that  the  rate  of  taxation  should  increase  as  the  income  in¬ 
creases.  It  is  restricted  in  Virginia  to  income  derived  from  “in¬ 
terest  and  profits.”  This  is  wrong.  It  should  he  levied  on  all 
incomes,  regardless  of  the  source  from  which  it  is  derived.  There 
should  he  no  increase  of  privileged  property.  It  increases  the  diffi¬ 
culty  of  ascertaining  that  wdiich  should  be  taxed,  and  furnishes  an¬ 
other  objection  to  the  law.  A  tax  on  property  is  a  tax  on  all 
things.  A  piece  of  land,  as  such,  pays  tax  according  to  its  value, 
it  matters  not  who  owns  it  or  what  is  its  value.  An  income  tax 
is  strictly  a  personal  tax.  The  law  should  ask,  how  much  income 
has  this  person?  It  is  regardless  of  any  particular  source  from 
which  it  is  derived.  It  includes  all  sources. 

Railroad  Taxation. 

Our  law  on  the  subject  of  railroad  taxation  is  the  result  of 
much  deliberation ;  still  there  are  complaints  as  to  the  manner  of 
assessing  the  various  roads  of  our  State,  and  the  amount  of  taxa¬ 
tion  to  he  exacted  from  them. 

The  Constitution  requires  that  they  should  be  taxed  accord¬ 
ing  to  their  values,  like  other  property,  and  this  is  fixed  by  ascer¬ 
taining  their  values  per  mile.  There  are,  however,  grave  doubts 
whether  this  is  the  fairest  method  of  ascertaining  their  taxable 
value.  The  same  trouble  which  has  been  discussed  with  reference 
to  other  subjects  arises  here.  Their  cost  per  mile  cannot  be  a  fair 
criterion  by  which  to  judge  of  their  values,  though  it  is  one  circum¬ 
stance  by  which  to  test  its  accuracy.  Its  earnings  would  be  another. 
Then  what  earnings  ?  Its  net  or  its  gross  earnings  ?  There  is  a  dif¬ 
ference  of  opinion  on  this  subject,  each  of  these  modes  having  been 
tried  in  various  States. 


[30] 


There  is  but  little  uniformity  on  this  subject.  The  railroads 
have  received  valuable  rights  and  privileges  from  the  people,  and 
in  return  they  confer  great  benefits  by  extending  and  developing  the 
business  of  the  State  through  which  they  pass,  thus  making  prop¬ 
erty  more  valuable  and  residence  in  the  country  more  desirable. 
They  indicate  prosperity  and  progress.  On  their  lines  you  will  see 
evidences  of  thrift  and  energy  which  will  be  sought  in  vain  in  locali¬ 
ties  remote  from  them.  Villages  spring  up  and  new  towns  and 
cities  are  built,  and  the  old  ones  increase  in  wealth  and  prosperity. 

Every  reasonable  indulgence  should  be  extended  to  railroads 
until  their  business  connections  have  been  well  established.  Then 
they  should  be  compelled  to  bear  their  full  proportion  of  the  public 
burden.  Like  assessments  on  other  property,  their  values  will  be 
changing  according  to  the  amount  of  business  they  are  doing,  and 
what  is  a  fair  assessment  to-day  may  after  a  few  years  of  business 
success  prove  insufficient  for  their  just  proportionment.  Various 
methods  have  been  tried  and  each  of  them  should  be  carefully  exam¬ 
ined  with  the  results  they  have  given,  and  the  method  which  experi¬ 
ence  shows  to  be  the  best,  and  the  fairest  should  be  adopted.  Expe¬ 
rience  alone  can  determine  this. 

Collateral  Inheritance  Tax. 

The  law  in  some  of  the  States  imposes  a  tax  on  collateral  in¬ 
heritances,  and  it  is  a  source  of  considerable  revenue.  In  Pennsyl¬ 
vania  the  tax  derived  from  this  source  amounted  to  over  $700,000 
in  the  year  1888.  In  New  York,  in  1887,  it  amounted  to  $551,716 ; 
in  1888,  $736,000;  in  1889,  more  than  $1,000,000.  There  is  no 
purpose  to  lay  a  burden  upon  the  common  and  natural  succession, 
such  as  descent  of  property  from  parent  to  child,  or  from  child  to 
parent,  but  only  on  such  property  as,  through  the  permission  and 
protection  of  the  statute,  comes  into  possession  of  persons  and  cor¬ 
porations  who  have  had  no  hand  in  making  it,  and  no  natural  claims 
upon  those  from  whom  it  is  derived.  It  is  acquired  under  the 
statute,  and  does  not  come  by  natural  right,  and  it  would  seem  that 
a  gift  allowed  by  the  law  may  be  properly  taxed  by  the  law  which 
allows  it.  It  is  an  income  received  without  labor  or  expense  on  the 
part  of  the  receiver — properly  transferred  by  the  permission  and 
protection  of  the  government  from  the  dead  to  the  living,  who  has 
no  natural  property  rights  in  it.  When  property  is  so  situated  as 
to  pass  to  a  new  owner,  who  has  no  agency  in  its  earnings  it  is  onlv 
just  and  reasonable  that  a  tax  should  be  paid  to  the  State  whose 
law  allows  it.  What  could  be  more  reasonable  than  such  a  tax,  in 
the  final  distribution  of  an  estate  ?  Who  could  complain  of  it  ?  Not 
the  giver.  If  it  was  disagreeable  to  him,  he  could  give  away  the 

[31] 


property  in  his  lifetime ;  not  the  receiver,  for  the  law  enables  him  to  ? 
take  the  property.  Would  any  one  object  to  the  tax,  when  by  means 
of  the  law  he  is  the  recipient  of  the  gift  ?  Some  years  ago  this  was  J 
the  law  in  Virginia,  but  it  was  repealed;  I  do  not  well  understand 
why.  It  has  been  decided  in  various  States  that  it  is  not  obnoxious  * 
to  the  Constitution,  which  requires  equal  and  uniform  taxation. 
Certainly  no  person  can  better  afford  to  pay  taxes  on  property  than 
those  who  have  acquired  it  by  gift,  under  a  law  which  allows  them 
to  receive  it,  when  they  could  not  receive  it  under  the  laws  of  descent, 
which  properly  follows  the  blood  and  gives  it  to  the  next  kin.  It  is 
a  very  correct  principle  of  government,  in  laying  a  tax,  to  impose 
it  where  it  can  be  borne  most  easily,  and  be  paid  with  less  oppres¬ 
sion.  Certainly  nothing  can  be  easier  or  less  burdensome  than  to 
contribute  to  the  maintenance  of  the  laws  of  the  State  a  small  per¬ 
centage  of  that  which  the  law  allows  the  citizen  to  receive  as  a 
donation  and  which  he  could  not  receive  without,  and  which  is  not 
the  result  of  his  labor  or  skill.  This  tax  is  growing  in  favor  with 
the  law-makers,  and  I  hope  it  may  be  thoroughly  discussed,  and 
maturely  considered  by  the  legislature.  I  believe  the  State  may, 
with  propriety,  enact  a  law  imposing  an  appropriate  tax  on  all  col¬ 
lateral  inheritances. 

Tax  on  Private  and  Special  Acts. 

Many  States  impose  a  tax  or  fee  for  private  and  special  acts  of 
the  Legislature.  There  is  much  propriety  in  this,  which,  while  it 
is  a  part  of  the  duty  of  the  legislature  to  enact  certain  laws  for 
the  benefit  of  private  parties,  yet  its  first  function  is  to  enact  gen¬ 
eral  laws  for  the  people.  Heretofore  in  Virginia,  a  very  large  por¬ 
tion  of  the  session  of  the  legislature  has  been  spent  in  considering 
and  passing  private  acts,  to  the  neglect  of  general  legislation,  and 
the  valuable  time  of  that  body,  which  is  limited,  being  thus  con¬ 
sumed  in  considering  business  in  which  the  general  public  had  no 
interest.  The  people’s  money  has  been  spent  for  the  benefit  of 
private  individuals  and  corporations,  and  the  business  of  the  State 
became  a  secondary  matter,  and  had  to  await  the  consideration  and 
completion  of  the  private  business,  which  could  be  better  disposed 
of  by  the  courts  of  the  country.  The  State  is  taxed  to  pay  the  cost 
of  legislation,  which  should  be  paid  for  out  of  private  pockets,  and 
the  work  done  in  courts  of  the  counties  in  which  the  parties  reside. 

The  evil  results  of  this  have  been  seen  for  years.  Laws  have  been 
passed  to  prevent  it,  but  they  have  proved  to  no  avail. 

The  legislation  of  the  last  few  years  will  show  that  out  of 
1.500  pages  of  acts  in  1889-’90,  1,043  were  private  and  252  pages 
were  public  acts.  More  than  three-fourths  of  the  legislation  was 

[32]  .*) 


4  for  local  and  private  purposes.  In  the  years  1891-’92,  there  were 
1,146  pages  of  acts  passed.  The  law  separating  the  special  acts  was 
w  repealed,  and  we  do  not  know  what  was  the  exact  number  of  each, 
^  but  we  believe  the  proportion  to  be  about  the  same  for  the  last  two 
sessions. 

If  the  expense  of  legislation  be  proportioned  in  the  same  way, 
we  will  save  the  State  a  large  amount. 

The  Special  Acts  Should  he  Separated  from  the  General. 

The  law  to  consolidate  the  special  and  general  legislation 
should  be  repealed,  because  the  volume  is  so  large  and  inconvenient. 
It  hides  the  few  general  laws  of  the  State  among  a  mass  of  private 
acts,  in  which  the  public  has  no  interest.  The  index  is  hurriedly 
prepared,  and,  therefore,  necessarily  defective,  and  it  becomes  a 
task  to  find  out  what  is  the  law  upon  a  particular  subject.  All  acts 
passed  for  the  general  good  should  be  placed  together  in'  the  first 
part  of  the  volume,  and  the  private  and  local  acts  at  the  end  of  the 
volume. 

I  would  advise  that  an  act  he  passed  to  tax  every  private  hill, 
and  every  special  hill  the  object  of  which  is  the  asking  of  relief 
of  the  legislature,  when  equal  relief  could  he  given  bv  the  courts : 
and  they  should  be  taxed  to  the  full  extent  of  the  cost  to  the  State 
necessary  for  its  passage  by  the  general  assembly,  and  for  its  print¬ 
ing  and  binding.  To  prevent  this  kind  of  legislation,  a  law  was 
passed  some  years  ago,  but  no  penalty  was  attached,  and  it  has 
proven  inefficient.  If  the  proposed  law  is  passed,  I  am  satisfied  it 
will  save  a  considerable  sum  to  the  State  in  expenses;  it  will  pre¬ 
vent  the  time  and  minds  of  the  members  from  being  occupied  by 
other  than  public  business,  so  that  more  attention  can  he  given  to 
subjects  of  general  legislation — all  of  which  is  greatly  to  be  desired. 


Do  Our  Tax  Laws  as  Enforced  Meet  the  Requirements ? 


Who  believes  that  all  the  property  in  the  State,  both  real  and 
personal,  is  taxed  when  it  is  shown  that  there  is  such  a  difference 
between  the  taxable  values  of  real  and  personal  property?  Does  it 
not  demonstrate  either  that  a  large  proportion  of  personal  property 
escapes  the  commissioner,  or  that  it  has  been  assessed  below  its 
value?  Is  it  not  then  the  duty  of  the  legislature  to  examine  into 
these  questions  at  once,  and  to  pass  such  laws  as  will  remedy  the 
existing  evil  ?  That  which  is  overtaxed  by  an  unjust  assessment 
should  at  once  be  relieved  and  the  burden  placed  where  justice  re¬ 
quires  it  should  be. 


[33] 


IIow  to  Do  This. 


My  object  in  discussing  the  subject  of  taxation  is  to  call  the  * 
attention  of  the  legislature  to  the  gross  injustice  done  under  the 
present  laws  certain  species  of  property,  in  order  that  they  may  be 
so  changed  that  a  just  and  reasonable  taxation,  which  the  situation 
requires,  be,  if  possible,  obtained  on  all  property.  The  difficulty 
surrounding  this  important  question  should  not  retard  us,  but  make 
us  the  more  diligent  and  determined  to  remedy  it.  Justice  to  the 
people  and  the  requirements  of  the  Constitution  demand  it. 

I  am  sure  you  will  not  allow  any  press  of  private  or  local  de¬ 
mands  upon  your  time  as  legislators  prevent  your  prompt  atten¬ 
tion  to  this  subject,  which  concerns  every  section  in  the  State  and 
all  classes  of  our  people.  During  biennial  sessions — and  they  limited 
to  ninety  days — there  is  not  sufficient  time  for  the  consideration  of 
this  question,  so  delicate  and  difficult.  It  has  been  a  number  of 
years  since  we  had  a  new  tax  bill.  The  question  of  taxation  was  not 
considered  by  our  revisors,  who  made  the  Code  of  1887.  Amend¬ 
ments  have  often  been  engrafted  upon  the  old  legislation,  but  they 
do  not  meet  existing  difficulties,  which  are  due  in  part  to  the  changed 
condition  of  the  property  of  the  country,  and  the  new  investments 
which  are  constantly  being  made  render  it  more  difficult  to  ascertain 
and  properly  assess  the  property,  and  enable  the  designing  to  more 
effectually  conceal  what  they  have,  so  as  to  escape  taxation. 

A  Special  Tax  Commission. 

Many  of  the  States  are  now  moving  in  this  important  matter. 

We  should  secure  the  services  of  our  best  and  ablest  men  to  inves¬ 
tigate  and  discuss  these  questions  in  all  their  phases,  and  to  report 
for  the  consideration  of  the  general  assembly,  in  writing,  the  result 
of  their  labors ;  and  a  bill  should  be  prepared  relieving  the  State  of 
the  difficulties,  if  possible,  which  the  present  system  of  tax  laws 
has  produced.  With  this  object  in  view  I  would  advise! the  selection 
of  a  committee  composed  of  five,  taken  from  the  different  parts  of 
the  State,  to  be  called  a  “Special  Tax  Commission,”  to  consider  the 
subject.  They  should  be  instructed  specially  to  inquire  into  the 
systems  adopted  by  the  other  States  to  raise  revenue  for  State, 
county  and  municipal  expenses,  and  to  provide  for  a  more  just, 
equal  and  equitable  system  of  taxation  of  all  kinds  of  property,  and 
which  will  be  better  adapted  to  the  wants  of  the  State  and  reduce 
the  rate  of  taxation,  and  to  provide  for  a  more  effectual  system  of 
assessments  and  collection  of  taxes,  all  of  which  should  be  done 
within  the  provisions  of  the  Constitution  of  the  State  and  of  the 
United  States.  The  committee  should  be  well  paid,  furnished  with 

[34] 


4 


a  good  clerk,  to  be  selected  by  themselves,  and  provided  with  com¬ 
fortable  quarters  while  engaged  in  this  work. 

I  submit  these  views  to  the  general  assembly,  with  becoming 
diffidence,  in  the  hope  that  they  may  serve  as  a  guide  to  such  action 
as  may  enable  your  honorable  body  to  enact  laws  which  will  insure 
the  enlistment  of  all  property,  both  real  and  personal,  and  the  assess¬ 
ment  of  the  same,  with  equal  and  uniform  taxation,  according  to  its 
value,  as  the  Constitution  requires. 


